66
Popular Culture Review
meaning and purpose and, as such, they are used to articulate a 'proper’ (i.e.
sanctioned) interpretation” (23).
The second major category of previously published literature
surrounding Fight Club deals with the film’s critique of consumer capitalism.
Christopher Duncan (“Liberalism and the Challenge”) argues in this vein that
American liberalism has altered our perception of die world around us and that
its citizenry must reevaluate the manner in which they live. Duncan believes that
Fight Club provides a critical commentary on this issue, but also that, in the end,
the film does not provide a reasonable substitute for the failed status quo. Bulent
Diken and Carsten Lausten (“Enjoy the Fight!”) take a more postmodern
approach in their assessment of the film. They believe that the corporate
network culture portrayed in the film promotes a kind of microfascism,
suggesting that when power loses a central focal point it becomes nomadic in its
expression. They argue that Fight Club relates directly to the question of
violence, fligh t, and action in the modem world. Paulo Palladino and Teresa
Young {“Fight Club and the World Trade Center”) take this postmodern
evaluation a step further by looking at the relationship between the September
11^ attacks and the end result of Project Mayhem as attacks on “civilization.”
Though most of the literature directly related to the film presents a
balance between positive and negative commentary, Henry Giroux criticizes
nearly every aspect of Fight Club. What Fight Club lacks, in Giroux’s opinion,
is that while it claims to challenge notions of capitalism it does not address real
problems such as unemployment, the rich-poor gap, or third-world exploitation,
and instead acts to “wage war against all that is feminine” (“Private
Satisfaction” 4). Giroux concludes that this type of hidden, white, heterosexist
patriarchy is more dangerous than overt actions within the same framework
because Fight Club hides these faulty values within claims of progressive
change and equality.
In Bormann We Trust
Most authors have approached their analysis with an eye toward the
gender issues or a cinematic critique of the film. Our work approaches the film
differently, utilizing a rhetorical perspective. Ernest Bormann’s fantasy theme
methodology provides a particularly useful means for conducting this analysis
(“Fantasy and Rhetorical Vision”). Bormann contends that as small groups
develop, they establish their own unique set of “wordplay, narratives, figures,
and analogies” {The Force o f Fantasy 6) that become a means for them to
connect with each other through events that only the group members understand.
He calls this group-based rhetoric “symbolic convergence” based upon the
theory that in the beginning these stories have no meaning for the individual
group members, but as the group develops and their ideology becomes distinct,
these stories, catch-phrases, and jokes become a shared reality, letting group
members see the world in the same way.